EBUF vs. XBJA

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EBUF (Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly) and XBJA (Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, EBUF returned 16.13% vs 14.46% for XBJA. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EBUF charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for XBJA.

Performance

EBUF vs. XBJA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) and Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EBUF achieves a 9.96% return, which is significantly higher than XBJA's 5.57% return.

EBUF

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 1.04%
• YTD: 9.96%
• 6M: 11.41%
• 1Y: 16.13%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XBJA

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 1.84%
• YTD: 5.57%
• 6M: 6.05%
• 1Y: 14.46%
• 3Y*: 11.82%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EBUF vs. XBJA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EBUF Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	9.96%	11.55%	2.86%
XBJA Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January	5.57%	11.12%	3.86%

Correlation

The correlation between EBUF and XBJA is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2024	0.57

The correlation between EBUF and XBJA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

EBUF vs. XBJA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EBUF	XBJA
Technology	36.9%	36.2%
Financial Services	19.5%	11.9%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	10.1%
Industrials	7.5%	8.1%
Communication Services	6.9%	10.9%
Basic Materials	6.5%	1.8%
Energy	4.1%	3.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	4.9%
Healthcare	2.9%	8.4%
Utilities	2.1%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.1%	1.9%

Return for Risk

EBUF vs. XBJA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

EBUF

EBUF Risk / Return Rank: 94
EBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
EBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
EBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 95
EBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
EBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 96

XBJA

XBJA Risk / Return Rank: 78
XBJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
XBJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
XBJA Omega Ratio Rank: 90
XBJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
XBJA Martin Ratio Rank: 81

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

EBUF vs. XBJA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) and Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	EBUF	XBJA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.92	2.47	+0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.94	3.63	+1.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.73	1.57	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.90	2.72	+6.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	36.42	15.92	+20.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EBUF vs. XBJA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EBUF Sharpe Ratio is 2.92, which is comparable to the XBJA Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EBUF and XBJA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EBUF	XBJA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.92	2.47	+0.45
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.94	0.63	+1.32

Drawdowns

EBUF vs. XBJA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EBUF drawdown since its inception was -6.49%, smaller than the maximum XBJA drawdown of -17.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EBUF and XBJA.

Drawdown Indicators

	EBUF	XBJA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.49%	-17.42%	+10.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.82%	-5.33%	+3.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.57%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.13%	0.00%	-0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.49%	-3.14%	+2.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.44%	0.91%	-0.47%

Volatility

EBUF vs. XBJA - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) has a higher volatility of 1.69% compared to Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA) at 0.73%. This indicates that EBUF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XBJA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EBUF	XBJA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.69%	0.73%	+0.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.72%	5.13%	-0.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.55%	5.88%	-0.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.65%	11.59%	-4.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.65%	11.59%	-4.94%

EBUF vs. XBJA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EBUF has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than XBJA's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

EBUF vs. XBJA - Dividend Comparison

Neither EBUF nor XBJA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EBUF and XBJA in my portfolio?

EBUF and XBJA have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EBUF or XBJA?

EBUF has higher volatility (1.69%) compared to XBJA (0.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EBUF dropped -6.49% vs XBJA's -17.42%.

Which ETF is better, EBUF or XBJA?

On 1-year performance, EBUF leads with 16.13% vs 14.46% for XBJA. On fees, XBJA is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, XBJA has been the lower-risk option at 0.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EBUF or XBJA?

Over the 1-year period, EBUF has performed better with a 16.13% return vs 14.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EBUF or XBJA?

XBJA is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EBUF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EBUF or XBJA?

EBUF and XBJA have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between EBUF and XBJA?

Their fees differ too: 0.89% for EBUF and 0.79% for XBJA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EBUF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 2.47), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.